Educational policy-making is a complex issue, with
some decisions being made far from the classroom or school. Iceland
belongs to a multitude of international organisations which concern
themselves with educational policy and achievement. Two such
organisations are UNESCO and the OECD and the aim of this article is to
see what we might learn from some of their activities, in this case
focusing on sustainable development and educating for sustainability.
Several years ago the United Nations charged UNESCO with developing and
implementing the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development from
2005-2014, an initiative which has informed the debate on appropriate
school activities and provided a wealth of resources for use at local
and national level. Iceland participates actively in OECD programmes,
one of which is the Programme for International Student Assessment,
commonly known as PISA. Some questions in the PISA 2006 study concerned
the views of 15 year olds on environmental issues. In this article
definitions of sustainability will be considered prior to a short
discussion on education for sustainable development and a consideration
of selected PISA results from Iceland.

Dr. Allyson Macdonald is professor in educational
studies and science education and director of doctoral studies at The
school of Education, University of Iceland. Her recent research has been
in the fields of teaching and learning with information and
communication technology, science education and educational action for
sustainability.

Global initiatives in education

Policy-making in education is a complex issue
ranging from decisions made in classrooms by individual teachers to the
development of guidelines for the development of a national curriculum.
Increasingly policy is shaped by regional, global or economic
partnerships. Iceland is a member state of the OECD (Organisation for
Economic and Cultural Development) and has a permanent delegation to
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization). Iceland participates in a range of OECD and UNESCO
activities, including assessments and initiatives in education. This
purpose of this short paper is to highlight two major activities
currently underway at the OECD and UNESCO and consider what might be
learnt about education in Iceland from such partnerships. The particular
example in this paper is education for sustainable development, also
known in the literature as ESD.

The Programme for International Student Assessment
(PISA), developed in the late 1990s by the OECD with international
surveys scheduled every three years to test key competencies of 15 year
olds in reading, mathematics and science. The first survey was in 2000.
Key features driving PISA have included policy orientation, an
innovative ‘literacy’ concept, relevance to lifelong learning, regular
testing and breadth of geographical coverage (OECD, 2007, p. 16-17).

In 2006 the main assessment area was on science
competencies. Some items measured knowledge of science and others
assessed whether students could identify scientific issues, explain
scientific phenomena and use scientific evidence. Applications of
science were set in personal, social and global settings and issues such
as health, natural resources, the environment, hazards and frontiers of
science and technology were raised in assessment items (OECD, 2007, p.
21). The level of awareness of the role of science and technology in
shaping our environment and the level of concern for the environment was
also assessed. Some results from PISA will be presented later in the
paper.

In recent years the United Nations has charged
UNESCO with two key initiatives which echo OECD interests. One is the
Decade of Literacy (UNLD) from 2003-2012 and the other the Decade of
Education for Sustainable Development (also known as DESD) from
2005-2014. Such initiatives are carefully monitored for progress towards
their goals (UNESCO, 2007, 2009, United Nations, 2008), including the
progress being made by individual states. There are some signs that the
DESD is starting to make an impact in Iceland both on policy and
practice, in government ministries, schools, local authorities, civil
service organisations and companies. Seminars have been held
(Umhverfisfræðsluráð og Landvernd, 2009), research projects are underway
(e.g. GETA, 2008) and new policy documents on sustainable development
are being prepared (Umhverfisráðuneyti, 2009).

In the next two sections there are short discussions
on current understandings of sustainable development and ESD. Then some
relevant PISA findings will be considered, particularly the attitudes
and awareness of 15 year olds with regard to environmental issues and
sustainable development.

Sustainable development

Sustainable development is a ‘contested concept’
drawing on a variety of world-views (Giddings, Hopwood & O’Brien, 2002,
Huckle, 2005). Three sectors have been traditionally involved in the
concept – economy, environment and society. The model of intersecting
sectors (Figure 1) is based on a rational approach where the solutions
to sustainability in one sector are generally sought within that sector
and only occasionally through interacting with one or both of the other
sectors. A nested model or radical approach to sustainable development
(Figure 2) is such that the sectors are interdependent with the
environment as the limit. Giddings et al. (2002) maintain that the
nested model still suggests that economy, environment and society are
somehow separate entities. They argue that the boundary between society
and the environment is ‘fuzzy’, and that it may be more helpful to focus
on the more general idea of human needs and well-being than on the
economy or society, leading to the model in Figure 3.

Hopwood, Mellor and O’ Brien (2005) then go a step
further in disentangling the two entities shown in Figure 3 by mapping
them on separate axes of equality and the environment (Figure 4). This
makes it possible to tease out both the level of environmental concern
and the extent of socio-economic well-being and equality in particular
initiatives. Hopwood and colleagues take examples and conclude that much
of the current debate on sustainability and related activity is still
located in the ‘status quo’ region. Approaches which build on the
transformative approach are more radical and are more likely to threaten
business leaders and politicians (Hopwood et al., 2005).

Figure 4 - Mapping of views on sustainable
development
(from a more detailed version in Hopwood et al., 2005).

Educational action for sustainable development

The problem for educators is to recontexualise the
issues and models of sustainability into formal and informal educational
settings (Bernstein, 2000) where they can become frameworks for teaching
and learning about sustainability. The different representations of
sustainable development either suggest a disciplinary approach (Figure
1) with perhaps a token nod to other disciplines or an integrated
approach (Figures 2, 3 and 4). For many the place to start has been
environmental education, of which the Eco-school (n.d.) movement is a
typical example. UNESCO identifies eight themes which fall under ESD:
sustainable urbanization, sustainable consumption, peace and human
security, rural development, cultural diversity, gender equality, health
promotion and finally, environment. Integrated or cross-curricular
approaches in formal schooling have proved difficult to implement
(Bonnett, 2007, Bernstein, 1996/2000, Huckle, 2005, Macdonald
& Jóhannsdóttir, 2006).

In a report prepared for the UK-based Teacher
Training Agency Huckle (2005, p. 15-16) talks about sustainability as
a frame of mind, a way of relating to nature. “Such a
frame of mind is committed to the co-evolution of human and non-human
nature and seeks relationships within and between bio-physical and
social systems which allow their mutual development to take place in
sustainable ways” (Huckle, p. 15-16). Bonnett (2007, p. 712) reminds us
that it is important that “we experience nature as ‘self-arising’ …
nature is not socially produced”. Bonnett (p. 717) suggests that the
kind of knowledge that learners require will not be exclusively or even
predominantly scientific:

The value of a more intimate, intuitive,
non-logical style of encounter with the world needs to be acknowledged,
one whose rigour derives less from adherence to superimposed rules upon
experience and more from an open attentiveness to the things
experienced.

If Bonnett and Huckle are correct, then ESD should
be about developing a “frame of mind” and needing many kinds of
knowledge, as is clear from the eight themes suggested by UNESCO. The
questions for educators would be – what sort of views are to be
developed among learners? Are only rational views involved? Roth (2007)
has suggested that emotion plays a key role in learning. Littledyke
(2008) has discussed the relationship between cognitive and affective
learning issues. The question for ESD might be – how do we evoke emotion
among learners? Where is emotion to be found in Figures 3 and 4? A
powerful, perhaps emotive, idea for ESD is found in Bowers (2007, p.
48-49) who suggests that we reintroduce the notion of the commons:

… as practiced over the time span of human history,
represented by what is shared in common and upon which life depends:
water, fields, woodlands, animals, plants, air, and so forth. The
commons also includes the symbolic systems of the culture – language,
narratives, expressive arts, technological knowledge, norms governing
moral reciprocity, and so forth. ... While one of the primary goals of
the Western techno-scientific-industrial culture is the further
enclosure of the commons, there are still aspects of the natural and
symbolic world that have not been brought under the control of market
forces.

The central issue for educators is the nature of the
knowledge needed for thinking sustainably and its relocation from
society and official discourse into educational settings. The PISA
surveys can give us a glimpse of the kind of knowledge and attitudes
that 15 year olds possessed in 2006. PISA assessed not only scientific
literacy, but also engagement in science and attitudes towards the
environment, one of the eight UNESCO themes.

Knowledge of and attitudes towards
science and the environment

PISA 2006 assessed the performance of 15 year olds
in all 30 OECD countries and 27 other countries on a variety of measures
related to science, as well as reading and mathematics (OECD, 2007). The
mean for OECD countries was set at 500. Finland, the top performing
country had a mean score of 563. Iceland had a mean score of 491 and was
grouped with countries like Sweden (503), Denmark (496), France (495),
the US (489), Spain (488) and Norway (487) (Almar Miðvik Halldórsson,
Ragnar F. Ólafsson & Júlíus K. Björnsson, 2007, p. 25).

Results on the value of science, awareness of
environmental issues and concern, optimism and responsibility towards
sustainable development are presented in the next section with a
comparison of the Icelandic and the OECD mean. Results from the same
questions have been discussed for the United States (Bybee, 2008) and
for the United Kingdom (Schleicher, 2007). An analysis of student
performance in environmental science and geoscience in PISA 2006 can be
found in a report from the OECD (2009).

The value of science and technology

Some questions in the PISA study assessed the extent
to which students valued the role of science in understanding the
natural and constructed world (OECD, 2007, p. 127). Icelandic students
distinguished between advances in science and technology improving the
economy, with 76% agreeing with such a view, but only 53% indicating
that advances usually bring social benefits (Table 1), a similar result
to Denmark. About two-thirds of OECD countries valued science less than
the overall mean for all 57 countries. Students in non-OECD countries
were often more likely to value science than students in OECD countries.

Table 1Percentage of students who agree or
strongly agree with statements on the value of science and
technology (extracted from OECD, 2007, p. 127–129)

Statements on the general value
of science

% who agree or strongly agree

%
OECD

%
Iceland

Diff

Science is important for
helping us
to understand the natural world

93

93

0

Science is valuable for
society

87

86

-1

Advances in science and technology usually improve
people's living conditions

92

90

-2

Advances in science and technology usually help to
improve the economy

80

76

-4

Advances in science and technology usually bring
social benefits

75

53

-22

Being aware of environmental issues

Students were asked whether they were aware of
selected environmental issues (Figure 5). Many Icelandic students were
less aware of issues related to greenhouse gases, acid rain, nuclear
waste and genetically modified organisms than their peers in OECD
countries.

Student awareness varied between countries on
particular issues. For example, 83% of Irish youth were aware of acid
rain problems, but only 37% of Icelandic youngsters. Icelandic youth had
the lowest awareness of environmental issues (as shown in Figure 5)
among the Nordic countries and were the second lowest among OECD
nations, only Mexico ranking lower in the OECD group.

Students were then asked whether they were concerned
by these issues (Figure 6). The levels of concern shown by Icelandic
students on issues such as nuclear waste (42%), water shortages (49%) or
energy shortages (62%) were at least 20% lower than the OECD means.
Although some of this lack of concern may be attributed to Iceland being
an island community with no nuclear power and an abundance of water, it
can be inferred that Icelandic students have not taken to heart global
environmental problems.

Students were also asked whether they were
optimistic or pessimistic about improvement with regard to these issues.
Of the six problems Icelandic students were least concerned about
nuclear waste (Figure 6) and most optimistic about improvements in the
area, more so than in other OECD countries (Table 2). In general the
learners who answered the survey were not optimistic about the future
and there was weak negative association between performance and
optimism, i.e. the less students know, the more optimistic they then
tend to be.

Table 2Percentage of students who believe
problems associated with environmental issues will improve
over the next 20 years (extracted from OECD, 2007, p. 160)

Percentage who believe problems will improve
over the next 20 years

%
OECD

%
Iceland

Diff

Neuclear
waste

15

20

5

Water shortages

18

20

2

Energy shortages

21

21

0

Extinction of plants and animals

14

13

-1

Clearing of forests and other land use

13

11

-2

Air pollution

16

13

-3

Taking responsibility for sustainable development

Having assessed the level of awareness, concern and
optimism with regard to the six issues in the previous tables and
figure, the survey then required students to indicate the level of
responsibility they were willing to take towards sustainable development
in a number of problem areas. On six of the seven statements in Table 3
Icelandic students showed only slightly less willingness than other 15
year olds to shoulder responsibility for environmental hazards. There
was though a huge difference (24%) in the proportion which was concerned
about wasting energy on electrical appliances.

Table 3Percentage of students who agree or
strongly agree with a statement indicating a willingness to
take responsibility for sustainable development (extracted
from OECD, 2007, p. 160)

Statements concerning responsibility for sustainable
development

% of students agreeing or strongly agreeing

%
OECD

%
Iceland

Diff

I am in favour of having laws
that protect the habitats of endangered species

92

91

-1

Electricity should be produced from renewable
sources as much as possible, even if this increases the cost

79

77

-2

Industries should be required to prove that they
safely dispose of dangerous waste materials

92

89

-3

I am in favour of having laws that regulate factory
emissions even if this would increase the price of products

69

65

-4

It is important to carry out regular checks on the
emissions from cars as a condition of their use

91

86

-5

To reduce waste, the use of plastic packaging should
be kept to a minimum

82

73

-9

It disturbs me when energy is wasted through the
unnecessary use of electrical appliances

69

45

-24

Correlations between awareness, concern or
responsibility and performance

In Iceland levels of awareness of environmental
issues explain nearly one-quarter (23%) of the variance of performance
in science, but this is true only up to a certain level of performance
which is between 550 and 600 (Almar Halldórsson et al., 2007). Higher
levels of awareness do not change performance beyond that point. In
Iceland awareness was correlated with performance with r=0,484. This is
slightly higher than the correlation of performance with enjoyment of
science (r=0,473), self-efficacy (r= 0,463) and self-image (r=0,475)
(Almar Halldórsson et al., 2007, p. 71).

In all OECD countries, learners from more advantaged
socio-economic backgrounds showed higher levels of awareness, and those
from more disadvantaged backgrounds were less aware of hazards such as
acid rain or nuclear waste (OECD, p. 155). Levels of concern for
environmental issues (Figure 6) are not strongly associated with
socio-economic status nor with performance in the OECD countries. The
PISA team comment however that ‘...relative ignorance in science may
cause these issues to go unnoticed by many citizens’ (OECD, p. 157).
Lower performers are also more ‘complacent’ about the environment than
high performers (OECD, p. 161). Males were more optimistic than females
about the next twenty years, and high-performance students were less
optimistic than low-performing students (p. 161, 163). A stronger sense
of responsibility for sustainable development, as defined by seven
statements (Table 3), is linked with higher science performance in all
OECD countries (OECD, p. 161). This is also true of socio-economic
status but the effect is slightly weaker.

In summary the results of PISA 2006 tell us that:

Icelandic students
perform slightly below the OECD average in science.

Awareness of
environmental issues in Iceland is lower than in all other OECD
countries except Mexico.

Awareness of
environmental issues explains 23% of performance in science in
Iceland.

Levels of concern about
the environment are lower in Iceland than in almost all other OECD
countries.

Icelandic students,
like their OECD counterparts, are generally pessimistic about
problems being solved in the next 20 years.

Other factors, which
each explain about 20% of performance in science in Iceland, are
enjoyment of science, self-efficacy and self-image.

Just over one-half of
Icelandic students feel that advances in science and technology
bring social benefits, less than the OECD mean of 75%.

Only 45% of Icelandic
students are disturbed by energy being wasted by electrical
appliances, compared with an OECD mean of nearly 70%.

Today is the very first day of the rest of your life
...

The PISA questions presented here give teachers and
policy-makers in Iceland a brief glimpse of student views on science,
technology and the environment. PISA does not give us information on
student views on other sustainability issues such as rural development,
gender equality or health promotion. Nor is it obvious where such
cross-curricular topics might be found in the typical Icelandic school
curriculum.

There is little doubt though that the task of
working on ESD is not only multi-faceted but also urgent. Both OECD and
UNESCO tend to invoke the ‘future’ as a rationale for PISA or the DESD.
For example, the main results of the PISA 2006 study are presented under
the title Science competencies for tomorrow’s world and the PISA report
issued by the OECD begins with the words:

Are students well-prepared to meet the challenge of
the future? Are they able to analyse, reason and communicate their ideas
effectively? Have they found the kinds of interests they can pursue
throughout their lives as productive members of the economy and society?
(OECD, 2007, p. 16).

Similarly UNESCO states that:

The basic vision of the DESD [Decade of Education
for Sustainable Development] rests on the principle of using education –
formal, non-formal and informal – as en effective vector to bring about
change in values, attitudes and lifestyles to ensure a sustainable
future and the evolution of just societies (UNESCO, 2007, p. 5).

The problems of sustainability, as shown by the
UNESCO themes, are not though imagined problems, they are immediate
problems. The PISA results for Iceland on environmental awareness
indicate that many Icelandic students may not be well-prepared to meet
these challenge of the ‘present’. Might a more tangible goal for
education - for sustainability - be something like the statement of
purpose from the Paul F-Brandwein Institute (Bybee, 2008, p. 578):

... education should help students understand their
interdependence with nature and develop responsibility for sustaining a
healthy and healing environment.

Bybee’s themes are reflected in the three principles
and three levels of action for ESD (Table 5) recommended by the GETA
project here in Iceland (GETA, 2008). It is within educational settings
that the principles of knowledge, respect and responsibility can be
nourished (Auður Pálsdóttir, Allyson Macdonald & Ingólfur Ásgeir
Jóhannesson, 2009).

Table 4
Principles of and actions for ESD as proposed
by the GETA project (2008)

Developing knowledge for and about
sustainable development

Actions for teaching and learning, in formal
and informal settings, that enable teachers and learners to
build up their knowledge about natural resources and sustainable
development.

Encouraging respect for nature and society

Actions within schools that encourage a
respect for critical values, democratic procedures and social
inclusion in developing sustainable practices in Iceland and
elsewhere.

Nurturing a sense of shared responsibility for our common future

Actions at local community level that encourage schools and
other organisations to work together in sharing responsibility
for a sustainable quality of life.

The PISA results would indicate, with regard to the
environment, that actions at all three levels are necessary if Icelandic
teachers and learners are to develop the frame of mind necessary for
sustainability to be a real option. It follows that teacher educators,
both preservice and inservice, need to bring issues of sustainability
into the curriculum and the principles of knowledge, respect and
responsibility into the foreground. A good starting point for teacher
educators are the web-based resources and report by John Huckle (2005)
prepared for the Teacher Training Agency in England.